Mursilis, THN's cap page has salary cap info and links to where you can find even more detailed information.

"I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need. You draft the best available football player on the board. ... Because, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games." - Scot McCloughan

Irn-Bru wrote:Mursilis, THN's cap page has salary cap info and links to where you can find even more detailed information.

Thanks. And whoever put that together, nice work!

As always, BH is the main to thank for THN. 1niksder is our capologist, so he also gets credit for that page. . .it's by far the best Skins' cap resource on the web.

"I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need. You draft the best available football player on the board. ... Because, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games." - Scot McCloughan

You can see what the Skins are trying to do with these contracts, but the logic of it is mindboggling....is it more of a priority to sign guys like Archuletta to deals that appear to be blockbusters...or resign your own players for deals that are much smaller and keep continuity with the "team"?

I just dont see how the concept of winning is pursued with this method...however you speculate Arch's contract...he will still get more in bonus money than it took to sign Clark for 4 years...that is just retarded to me....in order for the contract to make since, we will have to cut the guy and then either promote from within or bring in someone else...well we don't have many draft picks so that will put us in the same position in another couple of years...meanwhile we are not getting the production to justify the dollars.

The Hogster wrote:You can see what the Skins are trying to do with these contracts, but the logic of it is mindboggling....is it more of a priority to sign guys like Archuletta to deals that appear to be blockbusters...or resign your own players for deals that are much smaller and keep continuity with the "team"?

I just dont see how the concept of winning is pursued with this method...however you speculate Arch's contract...he will still get more in bonus money than it took to sign Clark for 4 years...that is just retarded to me....in order for the contract to make since, we will have to cut the guy and then either promote from within or bring in someone else...well we don't have many draft picks so that will put us in the same position in another couple of years...meanwhile we are not getting the production to justify the dollars.

One thing about these contracts you have to remember is that the agents are frequently behind these bonuses/escalators/etc. which make a contract look bigger than it actually is. The more they can puff up a contract with meaningless bonus clauses which the player has little chance of claiming, the better they'll look in the press when it's announced Player X signed a 5yr/$30M deal with Team Y.

The Hogster wrote:You can see what the Skins are trying to do with these contracts, but the logic of it is mindboggling....is it more of a priority to sign guys like Archuletta to deals that appear to be blockbusters...or resign your own players for deals that are much smaller and keep continuity with the "team"?

I just dont see how the concept of winning is pursued with this method...however you speculate Arch's contract...he will still get more in bonus money than it took to sign Clark for 4 years...that is just retarded to me....in order for the contract to make since, we will have to cut the guy and then either promote from within or bring in someone else...well we don't have many draft picks so that will put us in the same position in another couple of years...meanwhile we are not getting the production to justify the dollars.

One thing about these contracts you have to remember is that the agents are frequently behind these bonuses/escalators/etc. which make a contract look bigger than it actually is. The more they can puff up a contract with meaningless bonus clauses which the player has little chance of claiming, the better they'll look in the press when it's announced Player X signed a 5yr/$30M deal with Team Y.

That has nothing to do with the Redskins re-signing Ryan Clark for less than what we paid Archuletta in bonus money. By the way, my cousin is a sports agent and before I went to law school, I worked for him....this was prior to the CBA extension, but I understand the concept of negotiating a player contract....the problem that I have is our philosophy of throwing huge bonuses at players who were someone elses guy instead of taking care of our own players that have performed for us.

Combine that with our weird system of evaluating talent, and you have a recipe for disaster...guys come here, get paid, and don't work out. I was listening to a replay of Red Auerbach's interview with John Thompson, and he said something very profound.

He said if an agent came into his office and tried to negotiate a deal based on a bunch of statistics, he would put the guy out. He said the key to winning was to always have your players believing that their compensation is tied to their contribution to winning games.

The Redskins don't do that because we keep bringing in guys, throwing a huge amount of money at them, then expecting them to remain hungry.

Apply that to the NFL and its no surprise that the teams who have won the last 4 Superbowls have had payrolls well into the bottom 3rd of the NFL...the Pats and Steelers have consistently had payrolls of under 80 million.......Redskins are up over 117 million.